Skip to main content

Callender v. State

Citations

  • 193 Ind. 91
  • 138 N.E. 817
  • 1922 Ind. LEXIS 108

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • relying on the reasoning of Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 6 S.Ct. 524, 29 L.Ed. 746 (1886) and Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, 34 S.Ct. 341, 58 L.Ed. 652 (1914)
  • relying on the reasoning of Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 6 S.Ct. 524, 29 L.Ed. 746 (1886) and Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, 34 S.Ct. 341, 58 L.Ed. 652 (1914)
  • “[if] the warrant is held invalid for any reason, then the property seized may not be used as evidence against a defendant”
  • “If the property was secured by search and seizure under the pretext of a search warrant, which was invalid for any reason, then the property so seized could not be used as evidence against the appellant and its admission over his objection was prejudicial error.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Willoughby

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

50 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Callender v. State

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.